Pat Robertson Takes it One Step Further

Did Pat Robertson get the memo? Or, is he trying to "one up" the Pope's earth shattering outreach to gays and his "Who are we to judge" comment?

Pat Robertson On Transgender Community: 'I Don't Think There's Any Sin Associated With That'

The 83-year-old televangelist sat down on Sunday for the "Bring It Online" advice portion of his Christian Broadcasting Network show, "The 700 Club." A viewer named David wrote in asking how he should refer to two transgender females who work in his office and have legally changed their genders. Instead of criticizing the trans individuals, Robertson approached the situation in a seemingly level-headed manner.

I don't know about a "level headed" manner. To me, he seems very uncomfortable, forced, yet scripted in this interview. About 2/3 the way through his talk, Robertson looks like he threw up, a little, in his mouth!

"A Sex change is a very permanent thing, believe me", he says, "when you get certain body part amputated......." Okay Pat, we believe you!

"I think there are men who are in a woman's body," he said. "It's very rare. But it's true.................

He went on to say he would "question the validity" of someone who just says, "Well I'm really a woman" because you "don't count somebody as female unless they really are, or male unless they really are."

His thoughts seems fractured and his justification seems rather confused, as he's really out of his element here.

He goes on to say that he doesn't think that a sex change procedure is a sin. While I don't think it is, I find this to be an "incredible"statement for a fundamentalist like Pat Roberston to make!

He, quickly and happily, winds up the discussion by saying "It's not for you to decide or judge."



In the second half of this segment he seems a lot more comfortable, as he tells a battered women that he's surprised that she hasn't shot her husband with her gun yet! He continues to follow the more liberal tone of this show's more "gay friendly" and "women friendly" attitude by encouraging her to leave her abusive husband.

Was Robertson pressured to echo the Pope's call for humility and acceptance? Who are we to judge?

reply to post by windword

In the second half of this segment he seems a lot more comfortable, as he tells a battered women that he's surprised that she hasn't shot her husband with her gun yet! He continues to follow the more liberal tone of this show's more "gay friendly" and "women friendly" attitude by encouraging her to leave her abusive husband.

Was Robertson pressured to echo the Pope's call for humility and acceptance? Who are we to judge?

At some point down a long road of anger, hate and control you realize you've lost that fight, and that your energy is better spent on important things.

I think Pat, may have realized that in the grand scheme of things, his more controversial stances were non issues. This could be a genuine change of heart, or he could just want more air time and being a liberal christian is 'in' right now I suppose.

Either way, if this isn't from some satire website I haven't realized yet, good for him.

~Tenth

He says this until something like a wildfire or severe storm hits a town/city that has a gay and/or transgender pride parade, then he will be back to his "gods wrath"" spiel.

Maybe he just "tried again" some coke and let his mouth get ahead of his brain.

Who trully knows what is in his head... I bet his god doesn't even know and just /facepalms when he decides to take a peak and thinks better of it.

Gotta admit old Pat is good for a laugh... every once in awhile.

Originally posted by windword
Did Pat Robertson get the memo? Or, is he trying to "one up" the Pope's earth shattering outreach to gays and his "Who are we to judge" comment?

It would surprise me if fundamentalist Christian Pat Robertson listened to anything a Catholic pope said. I think it's just more Pat Robertson dementia symptoms. But you are right, he is disjointed and kinda' all over the place. I"m thinking maybe early stages dementia or something .....

reply to post by tothetenthpower

I think Pat, may have realized that in the grand scheme of things, his more controversial stances were non issues. This could be a genuine change of heart, or he could just want more air time and being a liberal christian is 'in' right now I suppose.

This is EXACTLY what I think it is. He has realized that he's fighting a losing battle and that he is becoming more alone in his fight, so he's decided to tone down his true feelings until the risk of bad publicity goes away. Maybe, in "going with the flow", he will begin to open up and truly appreciate the alternative viewpoint he has found himself playing chess with.

reply to post by windword


Ok... so hurricanes and earthquakes are caused by gay folks but as long as a man gets gender reassignment before he gets with his partner, it's all cool?

Pat Robertson's hate and bigotry used to be consistently evil but now? I don't know what to expect.

I am a Registered Nurse and have had the displeasure of taking care of this man on three separate occasions. Believe me when I say that this man is a pompous ass. He is nothing like the Bible thumping, Jesus loving person he tries to portray himself as.

I would cringe every time they said he was coming in for another heart cath because they always assigned him to me.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


I actually think that his comments are anything but "going with the flow". I suspect that most of his viewers are sickened by the idea of transvestites in the work place or having to work beside someone whom they know has had a sex change.

I think his handlers and his producers said:

"Listen Pat, we've got to do something to keep up with the Pope and his following, and reach out to more women and gays for the sake of our show and the Republican party. Now, we picked out these letters for you respond to, and we want you to say something like what the Pope says, "it's not for us to judge'".

There is no way that I believe he's sincere in his comments that a sex changes isn't a sin. I think most Christians will say it is. At least, the ones I know think it's a sin.

I'd like to know what some of our Christian fundamentalist members think about this.

reply to post by windword


One can go with the flow and still cling to their beliefs. It's all a matter of appearances. He appears to go with the flow, and that's all that matters. That's what I was saying.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by windword
Did Pat Robertson get the memo? Or, is he trying to "one up" the Pope's earth shattering outreach to gays and his "Who are we to judge" comment?

It would surprise me if fundamentalist Christian Pat Robertson listened to anything a Catholic pope said. I think it's just more Pat Robertson dementia symptoms. But you are right, he is disjointed and kinda' all over the place. I"m thinking maybe early stages dementia or something .....

Not sure if you're trying to be funny but I caretake someone with Dementia and it's really really not a joke.
Just so you're aware. I mean, I never get offended over these things but reading yours I felt somewhat shocked.
It's a truly horrible thing. He may or may not have it but even if he did, you should have some compassion.
If I hadn't seen what it can do to a person with my own eyes I would probably say the same thing,
but I can't anymore, it's that bad.

reply to post by yourmaker


Your reaction sounds like you're stressed from your line of work.

Personally, I didn't see FlyersFan make a joke or show lack of compassion. I believe she hit the nail on the head based on Robertson's second statement.

He went on to say he would "question the validity" of someone who just says, "Well I'm really a woman" because you "don't count somebody as female unless they really are, or male unless they really are."

I really don't think he remembers what it is he's believed most of his life.

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by AfterInfinity

 

I actually think that his comments are anything but "going with the flow". I suspect that most of his viewers are sickened by the idea of transvestites in the work place or having to work beside someone whom they know has had a sex change.


There is no way that I believe he's sincere in his comments that a sex changes isn't a sin. I think most Christians will say it is. At least, the ones I know think it's a sin.

I'd like to know what some of our Christian fundamentalist members think about this.

Most of those viewers left him a while back. His comments do represent his catering to a ever growing vain in christianity and probably a reflection of the type of listener letters hes been getting over the last few years.

As far as what christian fundamentalist think, you, me and everyone else know the drill. You don't care what they think. You just want to lure them in for the fundamentalist bashing event to follow. Even using the dirty word "fundamentalist" which has become what the word "fag" once was.

I see it this way, Pat and the Pope represent Lots wife, pillar of salt christianity that just cant take their eyes off the thing for reasons not simply of fascination. They both represent a part and parcel of the thing, what Sodom does to good morals creating a christian critter that wish to set in the seat of judgment in the gate of Sodom like Lot did. These sort will cast their own young to the clamoring mob to placate enough to remain in their position.

Originally posted by yourmaker

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by windword
Did Pat Robertson get the memo? Or, is he trying to "one up" the Pope's earth shattering outreach to gays and his "Who are we to judge" comment?

It would surprise me if fundamentalist Christian Pat Robertson listened to anything a Catholic pope said. I think it's just more Pat Robertson dementia symptoms. But you are right, he is disjointed and kinda' all over the place. I"m thinking maybe early stages dementia or something .....

Not sure if you're trying to be funny but I caretake someone with Dementia and it's really really not a joke.

I was being dead serious. I think he's suffering from dementia.
Or at the very least, some kind of brain deterioration.
I don't know how on earth you got that I was joking from that.

Originally posted by yourmaker
He may or may not have it but even if he did, you should have some compassion.

And where EXACTLY was I being evil towards him? Answer .. no where.

You assume too much.

reply to post by Logarock

As far as what christian fundamentalist think, you, me and everyone else know the drill. You don't care what they think. You just want to lure them in for the fundamentalist bashing event to follow. Even using the dirty word "fundamentalist" which has become what the word "fag" once was.

WOW! I've never encountered anyone who was so offended by use of the classification "fundamentalist Christian". "Dirty word? Should we start substituting the "F" word now, instead of possibly offending someone by using the actual word?

Fundamentalist Christianity, also known as Christian fundamentalism, is defined by historian George M. Marsden as "militantly anti-modernist Protestant evangelicalism." Marsden explains that fundamentalists were evangelical Christians who in the 20th century "militantly opposed both modernism in theology and the cultural changes that modernism endorsed. Militant opposition to modernism was what most clearly set off fundamentalism." The name is taken from the title of a series of essays published by the Bible Institute of Los Angeles, The Fundamentals: A Testimony to the Truth.

As an organized movement it began within Protestant churches—especially Baptist and Presbyterian—in the United States in the early 20th century. Many such churches adopted a "fighting style" and certiain theological elements, such as Dispensationalism, but it is not an organized movement and has no national body or official statement.
www.princeton.edu...

The main reason fundamentalism has seemed to be on the upswing during the past 15 years is that new leaders, resources and rallying causes have emerged. The new leaders are generally pastors of nondenominational, Pentecostal, independent Baptist or Southern Baptist congregations. Their resources have consisted mainly of large suburban churches or television ministries, which provide them with sizable financial bases and either autonomy from, or power within, denominational hierarchies.

They are no longer concerned simply about the private beliefs of individual congregants, but with such social issues as abortion and pornography. Some of them founded church schools and feared these were being threatened by unfavorable court rulings. Others amassed funds and mailing lists in an effort to influence American politics directly. In the 1980s, preachers like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson were only the most prominent of hundreds of new leaders. www.religion-online.org...

I find it ironic that you would compare the distinction of "fundamentalist Christian" with "Fag"! Especially in light of the fundamentalist open objections to the gay agenda and the apparent divergence from their staunch position indicated in Pat Robertson's talk on the issue transgender and sex change procedures.

Considering that fundamentalist Christians are opposed to gay marriage, sodomy, pre-marital sex and are attempting to counter the creeping influence of progressive influence in the schools, such as sex education and the teaching of "animalistic Darwinism" and evolution, etc., I would think that there would be outrage concerning Robertson's accepting thoughts on transsexuality and sex change procedures NOT being a sin against God.

Personally, I think that we have a "God given right" to manage our bodies, whether it be through vaccines, surgeries, drugs, diet or activities. But, the fundamentalists believe that we need to be humble and accept the physical realities and the trials that they may present as God handed them to us.